User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/28/2017 11:12:41 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
M203 receiver marked 40mm not registered but doesn't have a barrel and never did. Sold as a rifle. Can you put a 37mm barrel on it and keep it unregistered? Would it be considered a flare launcher? What if it could accept a 40mm barrel too? What if you also have a registered 40mm in you safe with it but it has the 37mm barrel on it? Should be fine. I'm not a lawyer, but I do have a DD m203... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2017 1:01:23 PM EDT
[#2]
I have a registered LMT M203 already and 2 extra barrels for it.
This other receiver (ORF marked 40mm) would be sold to me as a title 1 rifle w/o barrel.....just the complete receiver wo barrel. I would like to convert one of my spare 40mm barrel with a 37mm sleeve So, it only takes 37mm rounds. Is that legal? Seems like it is. If its a title one weapon and the 37mm barrel is only 12 inches is it a SBR? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2017 1:30:30 PM EDT
[#3]
37mm bbls are smoothbore, I believe. So not SBR. AOW, SBS, other if mounted on a rifle?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2017 1:33:58 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a registered LMT M203 already and 2 extra barrels for it. This other receiver (ORF marked 40mm) would be sold to me as a title 1 rifle w/o barrel.....just the complete receiver wo barrel. I would like to convert one of my spare 40mm barrel with a 37mm sleeve So, it only takes 37mm rounds. Is that legal? Seems like it is. If its a title one weapon and the 37mm barrel is only 12 inches is it a SBR? I would email the ATF and ask about making a 37mm m203 from a title 1 receiver. I wouldn't want to ask them, but I wouldn't make one without an answer in writing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2017 10:58:34 PM EDT
[#5]
Yes 37 mm Is smooth bore So, I guess it doesn't apply?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2017 1:23:25 AM EDT
[#6]
37mm is a flare gun bbl. You don't have to register it as a DD unless you start throwing DDs out of it, or if you load up shotshells, IIRC.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2017 1:23:30 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
M203 receiver marked 40mm not registered but doesn't have a barrel and never did. Sold as a rifle. Can you put a 37mm barrel on it and keep it unregistered? Would it be considered a flare launcher? What if it could accept a 40mm barrel too? What if you also have a registered 40mm in you safe with it but it has the 37mm barrel on it? An M203 receiver without a barrel should be transferred as "Other" on a 4473 (if coming from FFL). It is legally considered a Title I firearm or receiver. It does not matter that it's marked 40mm. You may use a 37mm smoothbore barrel on it without changing its legal classification. The 37mm smoothbore barrel would fall under the flare launcher exemption to DD status. It can accept a 40mm barrel. All M203 receivers have this capability. Having a 40mm barrel makes the receiver a DD. I'm not sure I understand your last question... Do you mean a second M203 registered as a DD with a 40mm barrel attached? If you own a registered DD M203, then you may have all the spare 40mm barrels you want, since you have a legal use for them. If you do not own a M203 registered as a DD, then do not have a 40mm barrel anywhere around it, or you run the risk of being in "constructive possession" of a DD. No "anti-personnel" rounds either, which include less lethal rubber balls and beanbags. ATF Ruling 95-3 If you have a registered DD, you may possess and use anti-personnel munitions in it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2017 2:29:36 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a registered LMT M203 already and 2 extra barrels for it. This other receiver (ORF marked 40mm) would be sold to me as a title 1 rifle w/o barrel.....just the complete receiver wo barrel. I would like to convert one of my spare 40mm barrel with a 37mm sleeve So, it only takes 37mm rounds. Is that legal? Seems like it is. If its a title one weapon and the 37mm barrel is only 12 inches is it a SBR? 2. Title 1 firearm, not rifle. 3. Presuming the sleeving process is permanent (sorta like pinned/welded muzzle devices), I don't see any reason why a converted bbl wouldn't be legal to use on your title 1 launcher receiver. 4. Not an SBR because it's not a rifle...it's the nebulous "firearm" which is what you call something that doesn't meet the definition of a handgun / rifle / shotgun / SBR / sbs / aow / DD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2017 7:37:00 AM EDT
[#9]
Yes I own a registered LMT M203 w 40mm barrel and have 2 spare barrels
One of the barrels will have a smooth bore sleeve welded in it to accept 37mm ammo only I plan on buying the other M203 receiver as a title 1 and putting that barrel on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 3:13:08 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes I own a registered LMT M203 w 40mm barrel and have 2 spare barrels One of the barrels will have a smooth bore sleeve welded in it to accept 37mm ammo only I plan on buying the other M203 receiver as a title 1 and putting that barrel on it. You must either register the title I receiver as a NFA DD, ...or sell-off / destroy the spare 40mm barrels. Those are the only options to avoid "constructive intent". |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 3:43:54 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you buy a title I launcher receiver while already owning a registered 40mm DD (with spare barrels), you will put yourself in a state of "Constructive Intent" by having spare 40mm tubes, regardless of whether the title I receiver has a 38mm (or sleeved 40mm) tube on it or not. You must either register the title I receiver as a NFA DD, ...or sell-off / destroy the spare 40mm barrels. Those are the only options to avoid "constructive intent". |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 4:18:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you buy a title I launcher receiver while already owning a registered 40mm DD (with spare barrels), you will put yourself in a state of "Constructive Intent" by having spare 40mm tubes, regardless of whether the title I receiver has a 38mm (or sleeved 40mm) tube on it or not.
You must either register the title I receiver as a NFA DD, ...or sell-off / destroy the spare 40mm barrels. Those are the only options to avoid "constructive intent". You can have multiple short bbls for your SBR'd AR, and still have a Title 1 rifle AR lower. In what way are DD's different under the NFA? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 5:09:27 PM EDT
[#13]
Counting on the ATF making sense sounds like a very very bad idea...especially with the stakes of that game.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 5:11:17 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That doesn't make sense. You can have multiple short bbls for your SBR'd AR, and still have a Title 1 rifle AR lower. In what way are DD's different under the NFA? It's like pulling your pants down & bending over whilst holding out a jar of KY to the nearest agent, though the agent will likely ignore the jar of KY completely & just go straight to the act of fucking you over...sense or no sense. ...& technically, if you have an unregistered (non-nfa) AR lower half and an unassigned short-barreled upper - then you're in the same (constructive intent) boat. Don't believe me? - Go take those two items to an ATF agent & ask them about it. Might want to be wearing an iron chastity belt when you do so though. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 5:28:30 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's all about "Constructive Intent". Having the spare 40mm barrels (ie: unassigned) whilst also having a barrel-less title 1 receiver in your possession is simply bad juju with the ATF.
It's like pulling your pants down & bending over whilst holding out a jar of KY to the nearest agent, though the agent will likely ignore the jar of KY completely & just go straight to the act of fucking you over...sense or no sense. ...& technically, if you have an unregistered (non-nfa) AR lower half and an unassigned short-barreled upper - then you're in the same (constructive intent) boat. Don't believe me? - Go take those two items to an ATF agent & ask them about it. Might want to be wearing an iron chastity belt when you do so though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 7:18:10 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You got documentation for this new interpretation of pistol/SBR uppers? Like a link? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 7:46:52 PM EDT
[#17]
So, to be clear that I understand what you're saying:
If one has a single AR pistol, and a single AR rifle, then possession of a single additional AR bbl under 16" is illegal? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 7:48:49 PM EDT
[#18]
...except for the fact that "constructive intent" doesn't exist with the ATF, it's an interesting discussion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 7:59:58 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, to be clear that I understand what you're saying: If one has a single AR pistol, and a single AR rifle, then possession of a single additional AR bbl under 16" is illegal? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 9:40:32 PM EDT
[#20]
And your local popo might swap your uppers around or slide a stock on, which may have recently happened.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 9:42:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, to be clear that I understand what you're saying: If one has a single AR pistol, and a single AR rifle, then possession of a single additional AR bbl under 16" is illegal? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 9:52:52 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...& technically, if you have an unregistered (non-nfa) AR lower half and an unassigned short-barreled upper - then you're in the same (constructive intent) boat. Don't believe me? - Go take those two items to an ATF agent & ask them about it. Might want to be wearing an iron chastity belt when you do so though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 10:38:32 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...except for the fact that "constructive intent" doesn't exist with the ATF, it's an interesting discussion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
...except for the fact that "constructive intent" doesn't exist with the ATF, it's an interesting discussion. The simple reality check would be: 1 Does every lower or receiver have an upper or barrel & vice versa? (no unassigned AR lowers, launchers, or barrels)?...
Yes? ...Then do any of the pairings require NFA registration? - No? - good-to-go. Yes? - If NFA pairing is registered, then good-to-go. If NFA pairing is not registered - grab the KY. Does every lower or receiver have an upper or barrel & vice versa? (no unassigned AR lowers, launchers or barrels)?...
No? ...There is at least one unassigned short barreled upper or dd barrel. Can any of the unassigned NFA items be used to "readily convert" any non-NFA items that are present into NFA configuration? No - then good-to-go. Yes - Keep the KY on standby, Owner might get a tune up depending on the investigating agent's feels. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 10:42:43 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And your local popo might swap your uppers around or slide a stock on, which may have recently happened. Let's face it, if "they" really want to get you, they will. I don't know what the courts would say, but I would avoid the scenario the OP talking about. For my own peace of mind, I don't want to be in a situation in which there is no legal (assembled) configuration for that second receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 11:10:29 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I forget the details of that case but a good lawyer should be able to work with that...I mean, there's the "my client has a perfectly legal SBR, why would he go through that entire process and then risk 10 years in the can just to swap parts around?"
Let's face it, if "they" really want to get you, they will. I don't know what the courts would say, but I would avoid the scenario the OP talking about. For my own peace of mind, I don't want to be in a situation in which there is no legal (assembled) configuration for that second receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2017 11:28:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Yup if you can find a 37mm barrel you can slap it on there and don't have to register it. Just shoot flares and smokes, no projectiles. Any projectiles would make it a DD.
Now if you want to put a 40mm barrel on there you'll have to get it registered as a DD first. And then of course feel free to shoot projectiles. That's what I did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2017 12:30:28 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What FLDiveCop is pushing, that each bbl must have a legal receiver, is an entirely new reading of Thompson Center vs US. Every AR pistol bbl maker in the US would be going to prison. Having an unassigned short-barreled upper while also possessing a title 1 AR rifle (regardless of what style upper is presently on the AR rifle) could technically get you prosecuted for constructive possession of an unregistered SBR. Having a title 1 40mm receiver (regardless of whether it has a 37mm barrel on it or not) while also possessing a spare 40mm barrel could also technically get you prosecuted for constructive possession of an unregistered DD. The messed up part is that the difference between "could" becoming "will" in the above two statements is mostly dependent on the current feels of the investigating officer or agent. Don't believe me? By all means, feel free to go test those waters out yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2017 12:34:15 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you buy a title I launcher receiver while already owning a registered 40mm DD (with spare barrels), you will put yourself in a state of "Constructive Intent" by having spare 40mm tubes, regardless of whether the title I receiver has a 38mm (or sleeved 40mm) tube on it or not. You must either register the title I receiver as a NFA DD, ...or sell-off / destroy the spare 40mm barrels. Those are the only options to avoid "constructive intent". "Constructive intent" is not a thing. What you're describing is not constructive possession either, because he would have a lawful use for the spare 40mm barrels, and that lawful use would be for his registered M203 DD. Now if he was to leave his residence in a vehicle, and only have inside that vehicle his Title I M203 receiver with 37mm barrel installed, and one of the 40mm barrels also in the vehicle, but left the DD M203 at home, then he could potentially be in constructive possession of an unregistered DD. To my knowledge there has not been a case based upon such a scenario. I think it would be a defensible position, but the risk could exist of being charged. That DD M203 can have as many spare 40mm barrels around it as he wants, just like short uppers for SBR, etc. Wanting to have a matching combo for every part is paranoid (or just a great way to justify additional firearm expenses). 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2017 1:16:04 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is not what I'm pushing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: What FLDiveCop is pushing, that each bbl must have a legal receiver, is an entirely new reading of Thompson Center vs US. Every AR pistol bbl maker in the US would be going to prison. Quoted: lol - true. It would be more along the lines of determining/demonstrating "Intent to construct" unregistered [insert dd/sbr/suppressor/NFA item] for which could lead to arrest for "constructive possession" of aforementioned unregistered [dd/sbr/suppressor/NFA item].
The simple reality check would be: 1 Does every lower or receiver have an upper or barrel & vice versa? (no unassigned AR lowers, launchers, or barrels)?...
Yes? ...Then do any of the pairings require NFA registration? - No? - good-to-go. Yes? - If NFA pairing is registered, then good-to-go. If NFA pairing is not registered - grab the KY. Does every lower or receiver have an upper or barrel & vice versa? (no unassigned AR lowers, launchers or barrels)?...
No? ...There is at least one unassigned short barreled upper or dd barrel. Can any of the unassigned NFA items be used to "readily convert" any non-NFA items that are present into NFA configuration? No - then good-to-go. Yes - Keep the KY on standby, Owner might get a tune up depending on the investigating agent's feels. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2017 1:26:19 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's all about "Constructive Intent". Having the spare 40mm barrels (ie: unassigned) whilst also having a barrel-less title 1 receiver in your possession is simply bad juju with the ATF. It's like pulling your pants down & bending over whilst holding out a jar of KY to the nearest agent, though the agent will likely ignore the jar of KY completely & just go straight to the act of fucking you over...sense or no sense. ...& technically, if you have an unregistered (non-nfa) AR lower half and an unassigned short-barreled upper - then you're in the same (constructive intent) boat. Don't believe me? - Go take those two items to an ATF agent & ask them about it. Might want to be wearing an iron chastity belt when you do so though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2017 1:44:18 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Negative. "Constructive intent" is not a thing. What you're describing is not constructive possession either, because he would have a lawful use for the spare 40mm barrels, and that lawful use would be for his registered M203 DD. Now if he was to leave his residence in a vehicle, and only have inside that vehicle his Title I M203 receiver with 37mm barrel installed, and one of the 40mm barrels also in the vehicle, but left the DD M203 at home, then he could potentially be in constructive possession of an unregistered DD. To my knowledge there has not been a case based upon such a scenario. I think it would be a defensible position, but the risk could exist of being charged. That DD M203 can have as many spare 40mm barrels around it as he wants, just like short uppers for SBR, etc. Wanting to have a matching combo for every part is paranoid (or just a great way to justify additional firearm expenses). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If you buy a title I launcher receiver while already owning a registered 40mm DD (with spare barrels), you will put yourself in a state of "Constructive Intent" by having spare 40mm tubes, regardless of whether the title I receiver has a 38mm (or sleeved 40mm) tube on it or not. You must either register the title I receiver as a NFA DD, ...or sell-off / destroy the spare 40mm barrels. Those are the only options to avoid "constructive intent". "Constructive intent" is not a thing. What you're describing is not constructive possession either, because he would have a lawful use for the spare 40mm barrels, and that lawful use would be for his registered M203 DD. Now if he was to leave his residence in a vehicle, and only have inside that vehicle his Title I M203 receiver with 37mm barrel installed, and one of the 40mm barrels also in the vehicle, but left the DD M203 at home, then he could potentially be in constructive possession of an unregistered DD. To my knowledge there has not been a case based upon such a scenario. I think it would be a defensible position, but the risk could exist of being charged. That DD M203 can have as many spare 40mm barrels around it as he wants, just like short uppers for SBR, etc. Wanting to have a matching combo for every part is paranoid (or just a great way to justify additional firearm expenses). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2017 2:12:36 PM EDT
[#32]
No, they haven't. It's never happened.
If you're that scared of concepts which do not exist, it would be safer for you to stay home and never do or own anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2017 7:24:37 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, they haven't. It's never happened. I don't live in fear of this kinda thing happening, but at the same time i play it as safe as I possibly can when it comes to gun law compliance because even a gun charge could make me lose my job, and I don't want to lose my job. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2017 7:42:21 PM EDT
[#34]
So you live like how people played it safe in 1935 Berlin? I'm not sure I get your point.
If they can/will do bad stuff no matter what, then it doesn't matter how you play it. Some folks around here are pretty irrational. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 3:02:23 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So you live like how people played it safe in 1935 Berlin? I'm not sure I get your point.
If they can/will do bad stuff no matter what, then it doesn't matter how you play it. Some folks around here are pretty irrational. Not 100% sure what living in Berlin was like I'm 1935, but I'm guessing that the number of private citizens there that had a more capable collection of guns than I do is approaching zero, if not at zero, so no, I don't think I'm emulating their behavior. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 11:26:15 AM EDT
[#36]
Fortunately I'm not 100% familiar with that scenario either, but from my research it does appear that if you were a white non-Jew and did not "rock the boat" with the Nazi party, they'd allow you to own most weapons. In some cases permits were required, but you would be able to get them. I'm sure some German citizens had collections which were quite extensive.
I'm not sure if muzzle-launched rifle grenades were allowed, but the rifles to fire them were certainly available. The modern high/low pressure grenade launching concept did not exist until the Germans invented it in 1945. In any case, my point is that I'm more in favor of exercising my freedoms than I am fearful of "rocking the boat," so to speak. Governments tend to change their definitions of what a "menace-to-society" is, and I certainly don't want to leave my freedom completely up to them. It will be completely up to them if you are scared to "rock the boat" even if your intended actions are protected by law. Cowardice breeds appeasement, and appeasement breeds greater aggression by the aggressor. That is my point. Here is an article about firearms regulation in Nazi Germany. It isn't as bad as you'd think (but only if you were a non-Jew and did not oppose Nazi goals). http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/26/ben-carson/fact-checking-ben-carson-nazi-guns/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 1:25:59 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:In any case, my point is that I'm more in favor of exercising my freedoms than I am fearful of "rocking the boat," so to speak.
Governments tend to change their definitions of what a "menace-to-society" is, and I certainly don't want to leave my freedom completely up to them. It will be completely up to them if you are scared to "rock the boat" even if your intended actions are protected by law. Cowardice breeds appeasement, and appeasement breeds greater aggression by the aggressor. That is my point. Here is an article about firearms regulation in Nazi Germany. It isn't as bad as you'd think (but only if you were a non-Jew and did not oppose Nazi goals). http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/26/ben-carson/fact-checking-ben-carson-nazi-guns/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 1:38:40 PM EDT
[#38]
I comply with the NFA to the extent required by law, of course.
Fortunately I haven't had to pay for any tax stamps yet, but I still get to enjoy playing with NFA toys. I am eligible for certain tax exemptions by being a "government-type". (Yes, I would prefer those privileges be extended to you as well.) It is fortunate that here in the US, one is free to be as much of a wuss as they like, while still enjoying all the freedoms wrought by the blood of patriots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 3:13:02 PM EDT
[#39]
yeah well, I was an 0311, so I know where liberty comes from.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/24/2017 3:25:11 PM EDT
[#40]
You certainly do, and I thank you for your service.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
